Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!swrinde!ucsd!ucrmath!rhyde
From: rhyde@ucrmath.ucr.edu (randy hyde)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple2
Subject: Re: Stellar 7 re-release
Message-ID: <10622@ucrmath.ucr.edu>
Date: 15 Dec 90 06:34:31 GMT
References: <9012120353.AA26625@apple.com> <3137.27692c59@miavx1.acs.muohio.edu> <10127@darkstar.ucsc.edu>
Organization: University of California, Riverside
Lines: 18

>> The commonly accepted statistic.. the 1mhz Apple II (!) is faster than
   a 4.77 Mhz PC.

Commonly?  I never knew this.  I worked on PCs and Apple IIs side by side
when the PCs first came out.  The Apple II was much *SLOWER*.

>> Trying to compare computers based on their "C" compilers.

I agree that when you compare chips your comparisons should be in assembly.
However, when benchmarking systems you should compare them using the tools
that *WILL* be used to develop actual software.  The 4.77 Mhz PC and the
2.8 Mhz 65816 compare neck and neck for most applications in assembly.
However, compare Turbo C against ORCA C sometime.  The '816 is at a big
disadvantage because its architecture *STINKS* when it comes to HLLs.
I tried to talk Bill Mensch into adding some stuff to support HLLs in the
65832, but he's into producing controller chips, not general purpose
CPUs.  He thought my ideas stunk.
*** Randy Hyde